In ecological area the root cause of decadence is continuous increase of wealth and population increase in developing countries. Technique of unnaturalness is such technique which allows takeover of controls of natural processes by humans. For example, cultural plants do not grow and do not bear fruits without constant supply of chemicals; no longer relying on natural fertilizers only, but artificial ones; no longer able to defend against fungi, bacteria, and pests; but create artificial chemical protection. This technique naturally contains only limited ecological consideration; therefore is limitedly created in a way which minimally burdens the environment and exploits resources to the minimum.

In anthropological sense, these mentioned ecologically inconsiderate measures adversely affect human health, because it forces people to adjust to this pollution and decreases his capacity to stand up against diseases. New contraception measures also affect human fertility. Natural processes were also disturbed by medical provisions. Another factor which affects fertility is system of values in which important technical means is wealth. Technology and agenda of unnaturalness changed towards unnaturalness also human life in which significant part of manual labor is missing and share of stress and mentally demanding situations increased. Measures which directly limit fertility are technique of unnaturalness.

To understand imbalanced prosperity it has to be understood that technology and human labor inosculate. Women who can be employed because they do not have to bring up children work on technologies or related sector (sales or services), and create wealth based on both components. It is easy to imagine how limited the wealth would be if there were many more children. Despite all this, it is only possible to move within the frame of trends and not absolute numbers. Wealth which is consumed directly by adults instead of financing next generation which was not born is a direct consumable wealth. Who has no children will save money for his well-being. This sum can be quantified and I believe there are enough publications which state these numbers (see 7, 38, 57). The numbers are more than convincing in how vast share of prosperity this represents. At the same time it is possible to count how one can support upbringing and education of a single child at expense of children which were not born compared to more numerous families. At state level, it can be quantified how much the state with reproduction rate below replacement level saves on non-existent children in terms of wealth provided to the state compared to states with numerous families. But this is only small part of the problem.

Inherited property also has its effect. It is easy to quantify difference between families which in two generations had only one child and those which had four (see 8). The difference is 16-fold for the final descendant. This of course affects starting conditions of young people. Despite this, the component of technological prosperity should not be underestimated. This is the only way how to reach balanced wealth, ensure work of machines instead of manual labor, and free these for work for a family, not to fundamentally decrease total wealth. That is why advancement of technologies which replace human labor must be prioritized compared to all other components. By the way, these technologies tend to push people away from their jobs and decadence deepens because people who were used to prosperity do not start a family under uncertain conditions. But technological component of wealth is very demanding on investments and human invention. It never brings immediate prosperity like imbalanced components do because investments in technologies are expensive and require means and their generation is protracted. Whilst imbalanced components are immediately accessible, and the only thing needed are certain measures in societal order and moral values. History is full of examples like this; they only have to be correctly interpreted in a complex manner.

Just like technologies were one of the conditions of development of wealth at times of the peak generation, whilst the main source was in anthropological and ecological decadence, it won’t save the society from rapid acceleration of decadence, because these are not capable of rapid increase which would compensate for decadence to such extent. Nonetheless, it is desirable to support technical innovation and adjust life to them.

I do not consider new technologies, including information technologies, being a technique of unnaturalness. The only thing needed is to regulate life related to this technology, to prevent it from harming humans (computer games). Part of timeless humanism is to create such rules. New technology in fact serves return to naturalness and renewal of home. Cars and information technology allow humans to live in nice environment and work remotely. The same is true for renewable energy resources and for small engineering premises creating small workshops which are now becoming available and allow foundation of cooperative unions of small manufacturers for some goods which can compete against big corporations. All this mirrors in balanced wealth and home environment which provides opportunity to start a family but is neglected in current modernity; people are forced to move around and travel around the globe probably just to fulfill some ideological requirement to liquidate domestic environment and become global. The technology itself does not dictate anything like this.